(2026:JHHC:8665) 1 Cr Appeal (SJ) No.30 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 30 of 2026 Tarik Anwar @ Md. Tarik Anwar, aged about 26 years, s/o Md. Attaul @ Ataul Ansari, r/o Baccha, Mandro, P.O.+P.S.-Mirzachowki, Dist.- Sahibganj .... Appellant Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Md. Mahfuj Ansari, s/o late Jawahar Ali, r/o Village-Bishanpur, P.O.-Bhagaiya, P.S.- Mirzachowki, Dist.-Sahibganj …. Respondents P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ….. For the Appellants : Mr. Deepak Sahu, Advocate For the State : Mr. Manoj Kumar, GA III : Mr. V.K. Vashistha, Spl. P.P. ….. By the Court:- 1. Heard the parties. 2. This criminal appeal has been filed under Section 14A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 with the prayer to set aside the order dated 17.12.2025 passed by the learned I/c Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Sahibganj whereby and whereunder, the learned I/c Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Sahibganj has rejected the prayer for regular bail of the appellant filed in connection with SC/ST Case No. 53 of 2025 arising out of Mirzachouki P.S. Case No. 76 of 2025, corresponding to M.C.A. No. 757 of 2025. 3. The allegation against the appellant is that the appellant in a conversation over mobile with the informant has used some filthy (2026:JHHC:8665) 2 Cr Appeal (SJ) No.30 of 2026 language and obscene words against the Member of Legislative Assembly from Borio namely Dhananjay Soren and also made several postings in social media by referring the said MLA as sala santhal. 4. On the basis of the written report of the informant, police registered Mirzachouki P.S. Case No. 76 of 2025 and took up investigation of the case. 5. The appellant filed an application for prayer of regular bail and the same was rejected vide the impugned order keeping in view the gravity of the offence. Charge sheet has been submitted against the appellant for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 308(3), 356(2), 356(4), 351(2) and 352 of B.N.S., 2023 and under Section 3 (1) (r) (s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 6. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the alleged aggrieved person being the MLA of Borio has no grievance and the informant is a third party. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the learned I/c Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Sahibganj has failed to consider that the alleged victim has no grievance against the appellant. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the learned I/c Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Sahibganj has also failed to consider that in the photocopy of the alleged posting made by the appellant, nowhere any objectionable word has been used by the appellant in order to constitute the offence punishable under (2026:JHHC:8665) 3 Cr Appeal (SJ) No.30 of 2026 Sections 3 (1) (r) or (s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. It is then submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the learned I/c Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Sahibganj ought to have granted the prayer for bail since the appellant has been in custody since 21.10.2025 and charge sheet has already been submitted. Therefore, it is submitted that the learned I/c Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Sahibganj ought to have released the appellant on bail, more so as the appellant has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in ground nos. ii and xvi of this appeal. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer as made in this criminal appeal be allowed. 7. The learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer. 8. Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going through the materials available in the record, this Court finds that there is no material in the record to suggest that the alleged victim has grievance against the appellant. The copy of the posting allegedly made by the appellant in the social media annexed with the FIR do not show any offence punishable under Section 3 (1) (r) or (s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The charge sheet has already been submitted. The appellant has been in custody for a considerable period of time. The appellant has never committed any heinous offence. (2026:JHHC:8665) 4 Cr Appeal (SJ) No.30 of 2026 9. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that the learned I/c Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Sahibganj has committed a grave illegality in refusing to release the appellant on bail and keeping in view the facts of the case in the considered opinion of this Court, the appellant is entitled to be released on bail. 10. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 17.12.2025 passed by the learned I/c Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Sahibganj in connection with SC/ST Case No. 53 of 2025 arising out of Mirzachouki P.S. Case No. 76 of 2025, corresponding to M.C.A. No. 757 of 2025 is quashed and set aside and the appellant is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand), with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned I/c Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Sahibganj in connection with SC/ST Case No. 53 of 2025 arising out of Mirzachouki P.S. Case No. 76 of 2025, corresponding to M.C.A. No. 757 of 2025 with the condition that the appellant will cooperate with the trial of this case and will not make any posting in any social media during the trial of the case nor will annoy or disturb the witnesses of the informant in any manner during the trial of the case. 11. In the result, this criminal appeal is allowed. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 26th March, 2026 AFR/Gunjan/- Uploaded on 30/03/2026